the gritty truth about accuracy...
- Thread starter unwise11
- Start date
- Status
Zerodefect
member
That AK's "target crown" made me think of a Dewalt Drill and a Countersink bit. 
Hangingrock
Member
Unless you are a Bench Rest shooter I don’t see the relevance of continuously shooting off a bench rest. I understand it completely for sighting and load development. When the rifle is sighted and the load is developed get your back side of the bench.
To me there is more learned standing, kneeling, sitting, and prone position shooting.
I still even thou I’ve relocated belong to a club that has approximately 1400 members’. I’d attend club sighting days prior to deer season. In 19 years of such observation I could count on both hands with fingers to spare the number of shooters that stood up to shoot after sighting their rifles in.
Another noticeable trend was the absence of shooters utilizing the 200yd line after sighting in at 100yds.
What are easy to spot are the lack of consistency/technique, poor trigger control, and the anticipation of recoil when shooting of the bench. It only gets worse when shots are made from field positions.
To me there is more learned standing, kneeling, sitting, and prone position shooting.
I still even thou I’ve relocated belong to a club that has approximately 1400 members’. I’d attend club sighting days prior to deer season. In 19 years of such observation I could count on both hands with fingers to spare the number of shooters that stood up to shoot after sighting their rifles in.
Another noticeable trend was the absence of shooters utilizing the 200yd line after sighting in at 100yds.
What are easy to spot are the lack of consistency/technique, poor trigger control, and the anticipation of recoil when shooting of the bench. It only gets worse when shots are made from field positions.
AR27
Member
here is my exact take on accuracy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVzSAm5VhfE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVzSAm5VhfE
The gritty truth. I like that. 
I had a fun experience this weekend with my brother. He thought that his Simmons 3-9 scope was defective and wanted to borrow one of my extras. Well, the short of it, his scope was fine, but I discovered that my 3-year-old Millett 6-24 has had something let loose in its adjustments.
At 100 yards, my Weatherby Mark V .300 WM grouped a respectable 1" with factory loaded, Federal 150 grain ammo. Not bad for a sporter weight barrel and factory ammo. We ran the power down from 12X to 6X and my brother fired 3 shots. Again, the rifle grouped right in the 1" range, and the group was dead-center. The Hades of it was...the group was a full 10" low?!?! How the Hades can it group well, but have that profound of a POI shift?!
Well, we thought maybe my brother was flinching. So, I ran the power back to 12X, and fired three more shots. Now, the confounded critter grouped right in the 1" range, dead-center horizontally, but was a full 8" to the left?!?!?
In the end, ironically, his equipment was fine, just the barrel horridly fouled. We got the barrel squared away, and reestablished his Vangaurd .30-06's accuracy. But, my old scope had bit the dust. I'm just glad we discovered this on the bench, and not in the field with missed or poorly impacted shots.
Anyhow, I've always said, if you accuracy changes, test the suspected defective equipment with other components that are time tested. Seems my formerly tested Millett scope done bit-the-dust. Well, back to the factory it now goes.
Geno
I had a fun experience this weekend with my brother. He thought that his Simmons 3-9 scope was defective and wanted to borrow one of my extras. Well, the short of it, his scope was fine, but I discovered that my 3-year-old Millett 6-24 has had something let loose in its adjustments.
At 100 yards, my Weatherby Mark V .300 WM grouped a respectable 1" with factory loaded, Federal 150 grain ammo. Not bad for a sporter weight barrel and factory ammo. We ran the power down from 12X to 6X and my brother fired 3 shots. Again, the rifle grouped right in the 1" range, and the group was dead-center. The Hades of it was...the group was a full 10" low?!?! How the Hades can it group well, but have that profound of a POI shift?!
Well, we thought maybe my brother was flinching. So, I ran the power back to 12X, and fired three more shots. Now, the confounded critter grouped right in the 1" range, dead-center horizontally, but was a full 8" to the left?!?!?
In the end, ironically, his equipment was fine, just the barrel horridly fouled. We got the barrel squared away, and reestablished his Vangaurd .30-06's accuracy. But, my old scope had bit the dust. I'm just glad we discovered this on the bench, and not in the field with missed or poorly impacted shots.
Anyhow, I've always said, if you accuracy changes, test the suspected defective equipment with other components that are time tested. Seems my formerly tested Millett scope done bit-the-dust. Well, back to the factory it now goes.
Geno
unwise11
Member
very good turn around on this, I really dislike the argumentative threads where people get disrespective towards eachother.
But, I was just posting my feeling. but Boy can I wait till christmas, yesterday I picked out a Nikon Prostaff 3-9x40 BDC reticle and some leupold two piece bases for it.
wanna get that ugly nikko stirling off of my gun.
and if I get to sell the gun Im trying to I might just buy a Bell and carlson medalist.
its gonna be a great year.
But, I was just posting my feeling. but Boy can I wait till christmas, yesterday I picked out a Nikon Prostaff 3-9x40 BDC reticle and some leupold two piece bases for it.
wanna get that ugly nikko stirling off of my gun.
and if I get to sell the gun Im trying to I might just buy a Bell and carlson medalist.
its gonna be a great year.
Fields of Fire
Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2010
- Messages
- 3
I agree with this video. Anybody who has ever used a firearm in a real life or death situation relies on this type of accuracy. But seeing as you are talking about long range rifles its a tad bit different, still though all the snipers ive known pretty much just want to hit the torso.
R.W.Dale
Member
If you really care about shooting groups I urge you to reconsider the Nikon BDC reticle as it utilizes an inordinately thick crosshair that makes shooting for groups all but impossible in my experience. A great reticle for putting bullets into an 8" kill zone, not so much for putting bullet holes really close together on a piece of papervery good turn around on this, I really dislike the argumentative threads where people get disrespective towards eachother.
But, I was just posting my feeling. but Boy can I wait till christmas, yesterday I picked out a Nikon Prostaff 3-9x40 BDC reticle and some leupold two piece bases for it.
wanna get that ugly nikko stirling off of my gun.
and if I get to sell the gun Im trying to I might just buy a Bell and carlson medalist.
its gonna be a great year.
NWCP
Member
I don't shoot competitively. I enjoy shooting paper off the bench and I also use my shooting stick. If I can consistently place a round in the kill zone of whatever furry critter I may be after then I'm pleased as peaches. I'm concerned about making a clean kill, not a 5 shot sub MOA group on a hapless coyote, or whatever I'm after on a particular outing. I have a .17HMR that is a tack driver... if I do my part. I also have a couple of .22LRs that are quite accurate. When hunting though I'm more concerned with putting my game down as quickly and cleanly as possible. That doesn't require a sub MOA rifle, it does require that I practice with what I've got and do my part. Sure would be nice to be a crack shot day in and day out, but I'm not. I do however enjoy shooting and hunting. That's what it's all about.
unwise11
Member
I'll see how i like it, it doesnt seem too thick honestly. and I dont have plans to return it really.
AKElroy
Member
many of us don't compete, and we shoot to see how accurately we can get our hunting or target rigs to perform. A flyer doesn't help in that process, and needs to be discounted if you know you pulled it.
I shot competitively in high school, and then shot for qualification in the military. In real life, there are no fliers. It's another shot where you and the gun did put it. It's right there. Deal with it.
Calling it because you flinched, jerked the trigger, whatever, it's another shot in the lifetime aggregate you shoot. Frankly, if you could see that bullseye over thirty years, a 5" group would be miraculous.
It's easy enough to bear down at the range, or in competition, and know exactly where you stand in accuracy, but when you add in all the blasting, plinking, and low comedy, every shot we make adds to that lifetime group. Standing around with a sharpy and filling in the oops won't change it. Each and every one of us is only so good. It's the oops that define it, not the bulls.
Any time you need to see it, tack up a 1" bull at 100, shoot ten shots any way you can. Anything in the white is what you really shoot, too. If you disagree, hop on, plenty of room on the old barge floating down denial.
Calling it because you flinched, jerked the trigger, whatever, it's another shot in the lifetime aggregate you shoot. Frankly, if you could see that bullseye over thirty years, a 5" group would be miraculous.
It's easy enough to bear down at the range, or in competition, and know exactly where you stand in accuracy, but when you add in all the blasting, plinking, and low comedy, every shot we make adds to that lifetime group. Standing around with a sharpy and filling in the oops won't change it. Each and every one of us is only so good. It's the oops that define it, not the bulls.
Any time you need to see it, tack up a 1" bull at 100, shoot ten shots any way you can. Anything in the white is what you really shoot, too. If you disagree, hop on, plenty of room on the old barge floating down denial.
Until recently I had only seen it it pictures (Midway etc). Didn't seem that good. A buddy bought a Nikon with one and I helped him sight it in. I really liked it. It looked so much different than the pics. Your right, it wasn't made for shooting groups, but there is much more to shooting than shooting groups. I still like the Leupold and Burris better, but the Nikon is nice.
unwise11
Member
My Nikon is Prostaff 3-9x40 is crystal clear and the reticle doesnt seem to overly thick focusing on a rock in my back yard, about 50 yards. it is just a normal reticle with circles integrated.
but thanks R.W.Dale
but thanks R.W.Dale
Rancho Relaxo
Member
I too have been guilty of circling a shot farthest away from the others and labeling it a "flier". But like another poster said, the truth is that often times I shoot and it feels like I was off or something wasn't right and the shot lands right where it is supposed to. Plenty of "fliers" occured when everything felt just right and I couldn't believe the shot went so far off.
I no longer count fliers, the whole group is what I count.
I no longer count fliers, the whole group is what I count.
Skylerbone
Member
After 30 years of shooting, I finally did a search to find out how to measure groups. I shoot to kill and once the sighting in is squared away I make no excuses for myself. I can recall honestly only one bad incident in all those years, a squirrel I made a headshot on. By his chattering I knew I broke his jaw. After chasing him around from tree to tree (yes I was going nuts, I hated knowing he was suffering) he settled down and I put him down. I knew the scope and rifle were fine, it was me who failed that day. Cold bore or no, flyer or no, that is what becomes of oops in real life.
Apparently I don't follow the 5 rules either as most of my crosshairs obscure far too much of a small bullseye to be pinpoint accurate, then again they don't tend to get lost on target in the woods either. I can certainly own up to a few bad groups but that squirrel is still the only kill I've made that was not a one shot clean kill. It still bothers me to this day.
I still submit that any rifle I have fired is inherently more accurate than I will ever be. I'm not sad about that, it simply let's me know there is room for improvement.
PS, after measuring my second group ever (3-shot) it came out to .453", from a distance of 100 yards with a 3-9X duplex. I do know my -06 is capable of .000" 1-shot groups all day long;-)
Apparently I don't follow the 5 rules either as most of my crosshairs obscure far too much of a small bullseye to be pinpoint accurate, then again they don't tend to get lost on target in the woods either. I can certainly own up to a few bad groups but that squirrel is still the only kill I've made that was not a one shot clean kill. It still bothers me to this day.
I still submit that any rifle I have fired is inherently more accurate than I will ever be. I'm not sad about that, it simply let's me know there is room for improvement.
PS, after measuring my second group ever (3-shot) it came out to .453", from a distance of 100 yards with a 3-9X duplex. I do know my -06 is capable of .000" 1-shot groups all day long;-)
The gritty truth is that shooting at stationary targets on a range is about as removed from shooting at fast moving target shooting back at you as one can envision.
But having said that, and even with an AR on the way (and a fine one), my VEPR AK is as accurate a combat rifle as one will ever need, IMO.
But having said that, and even with an AR on the way (and a fine one), my VEPR AK is as accurate a combat rifle as one will ever need, IMO.
Ignition Override
Member
JD: You mean with iron sights? My first coaching with guns started last spring.
With the Garand from 100 yards, days ago the first round went about 3-4 inches further outside the main group which was 3", with a second 'flier' the same error in the middle of the total of about 12 rounds. Several made a smaller group of around 2".
It's Lake City 60's ammo from the box, and other than two groups of about 4" total, the 'best' yet, and better than with the Enfield #4. The Garand arrived in early August.
This iron sight 'bee swarm' means nothing to guys with your polished skills, but for this new guy who has received intro. personal 'coaching' (from two guys) maybe four times, it is rewarding.
With the Garand from 100 yards, days ago the first round went about 3-4 inches further outside the main group which was 3", with a second 'flier' the same error in the middle of the total of about 12 rounds. Several made a smaller group of around 2".
It's Lake City 60's ammo from the box, and other than two groups of about 4" total, the 'best' yet, and better than with the Enfield #4. The Garand arrived in early August.
This iron sight 'bee swarm' means nothing to guys with your polished skills, but for this new guy who has received intro. personal 'coaching' (from two guys) maybe four times, it is rewarding.
Last edited:
If someone is planning to be a long term precision shooter, mastering iron sights teaches a lot.
The Army doesn't have the time, money, or manpower to waste. It's red dots from here on out. They DO work better. Taking a new shooter who never handled a firearm and make them a qualified shooter in a few short days on the range is what happens. Basic Training has to deal with the most untrained soldier and getting them up to a minimum standard.
They have done the same for the drivers - all automatic transmissions. No time to take a urban transit rider and teach them all the finesse of double clutching a diesel transmission over rough terrain.
Asking a new shooter to learn iron sights is like asking a new driver to learn driving without power steering, brakes, or automatic. It makes the learning curve very steep - and taxpayer dollars finance it. No thanks. It's a wasted effort, especially if it's not their primary occupation.
What we would like to do and what we can afford to do affects us all.
The Army doesn't have the time, money, or manpower to waste. It's red dots from here on out. They DO work better. Taking a new shooter who never handled a firearm and make them a qualified shooter in a few short days on the range is what happens. Basic Training has to deal with the most untrained soldier and getting them up to a minimum standard.
They have done the same for the drivers - all automatic transmissions. No time to take a urban transit rider and teach them all the finesse of double clutching a diesel transmission over rough terrain.
Asking a new shooter to learn iron sights is like asking a new driver to learn driving without power steering, brakes, or automatic. It makes the learning curve very steep - and taxpayer dollars finance it. No thanks. It's a wasted effort, especially if it's not their primary occupation.
What we would like to do and what we can afford to do affects us all.
Concentrating on you good groups is part of a good positive thought process which is very important in high levels of shooting. Your mind doesn't hear the word "don't" when you say it. AKA, when you say, "Don't shoot a flyer", your mind hears "Shoot a flyer" and you visualize what that looks like. Now right before a shot, you have visualized a bad shot, and that is what you will likely execute.
By talking about your good groups, you are focusing on the positive. And don't feel bad about it. People don't tell stories about their average day at the range, they talk about the good days, or the days it was super windy and they managed to shoot about average. By focusing on the top of your abilities, you increase the likelihood of recreating it.
As for learning to shoot irons or scope, I have to go with irons. Note this is from a position shooter's perspective. With the juniors I coach, I strongly suggest making it to at least the Expert classification, if not all the way to Master in smallbore before trying scope. The reason why is scope can be frustrating. My iron sight hold have very little movement in prone. But put the scope on, and it starts bouncing around due to my heart beat. I'm used to this, but the kids think scope is like the movies where it stops on your target. Not so much.
On the other hand, it can be a great training tool. By seeing your hold, recoil, and follow through in such detail, you can figure out what you need to work on. We have laser training systems (Scatt, Noptel, Rika) which attach a laser under your barrel and hook it up to a computer and you can record your hold from when you get on target to after your follow through. These systems cost up to $3000 though, so a scope is a poor man's Noptel.
By talking about your good groups, you are focusing on the positive. And don't feel bad about it. People don't tell stories about their average day at the range, they talk about the good days, or the days it was super windy and they managed to shoot about average. By focusing on the top of your abilities, you increase the likelihood of recreating it.
As for learning to shoot irons or scope, I have to go with irons. Note this is from a position shooter's perspective. With the juniors I coach, I strongly suggest making it to at least the Expert classification, if not all the way to Master in smallbore before trying scope. The reason why is scope can be frustrating. My iron sight hold have very little movement in prone. But put the scope on, and it starts bouncing around due to my heart beat. I'm used to this, but the kids think scope is like the movies where it stops on your target. Not so much.
On the other hand, it can be a great training tool. By seeing your hold, recoil, and follow through in such detail, you can figure out what you need to work on. We have laser training systems (Scatt, Noptel, Rika) which attach a laser under your barrel and hook it up to a computer and you can record your hold from when you get on target to after your follow through. These systems cost up to $3000 though, so a scope is a poor man's Noptel.
R.W.Dale
Member
Optical sights are so good nowadays that from a military training perspective training for irons would be like saying I need to know how to use a rotary dial phone in order to post this reply via my iPhone.
I like my iron sighted guns but the technology has moved well beyond em.
I like my iron sighted guns but the technology has moved well beyond em.
- Status
